Probably a long shot, but do any of you guys have high res scans of the dust jackets for these? I got them all cheap, but the dust jackets are terrible beat up. Or a place to get new ones.
I keep mistaking these for exotic packs of cigarettes
>>8080993
They do have that kind of paper tint.
>>8081098
your smell, how is it? emparadado? you piece of shit? IT'S FUCK TO YOU
>>8081162
are you printing new dust jackets for your books by yourself at home? jesus christ, dude
>>8081332
Do you have a place to just buy dust jackets? Why are you acting like this is some terrible thing? People make their own dust jackets all the time, hell it's something schools have you do for your text books
>by yourself at home
Should I get my family involved in printing dust jackets?
>>8081411
You are removing any character the book has developed over it's years.
>>8081411
>Do you have a place to just buy dust jackets? Why are you acting like this is some terrible thing? People make their own dust jackets all the time, hell it's something schools have you do for your text books
>>8081960
Entire chunks of the existing jackets are gone. I'm keeping them, I'm not letting them get any more damaged staying on the book
how good is that series? is it biased?
>>8082536
I've never heard of anyone doing this. I work summers at a middle school, despite what you claim this is not done their either. This is the strangest thing I've ever heard of anyone doing.
Can I please see your bookshelf? Copies of books where you've actually printed out your own dust jackets? It's incredible to me, and probably everyone else.
Also, who told you to do this? When did you start doing it? What makes you think it's normal?
>>8082553
I've never done it before. These dust jackets have such big pieces missing I want to replace them. And in school all the time we put our own dust jackets made out of construction paper or something over the books to protect them per school guidelines.
These books also do not have the titles printed on the spine. So I figured I'd try to ask for scans before I just use something else to mark them
>>8082576
Over the text books I mean
Not op, but, christ, can't you people just post a scan without sperging out?
>>8082583
Can you? I've never scanned a book jacket in my life!
What is even the point of dust jackets? They're ugly, flimsy, akward, and they don't even actually protect the book from dust.
>>8082841
They inside flap tells you what the book is actually about
>>8082852
That used to be the job of the first few pages.
>>8082861
When is used to? I have hardbacks from the 50's and without the dust jacket there is no indication if it's non-fiction or fiction. There's no synopsis First few pages is no real indication of what an entire book is about
>>8082522
Foote is probably the most significant/influential/generally-loved historian of the Civil War. He wrote a very compelling, even beautiful, history and there's little which is technically wrong with his work.
That said, he is by no means the best historian of the Civil War. His books sometimes resemble a Norse epic more than a balanced history, dwelling on great men and military history to the neglect of social/political history. In particular he has been accused of being romantic about the Confederacy (though he is by no means a Lost Causer or a neo-Confederate).
If you're going to read just one history of the Civil War, it should be Jim McPherson's Battlecry of Freedom. But still, speaking as a historian, Foote is a national treasure, and though his books are not the best history of the Civil War, they're certainly some of the best literature (and still perfectly fine history besides).
>>8083299
Well, it is "The Civil War: A Narrative"
>>8082536
how could 4chan thread ever turn into shitpost fest?
